Alliance Tournament League-Based Modifications

Would it be possible to make a rule during the Tournament saying that switching alliances will void any participation both previous and following the switch?

It's as Kumomoto said. If players that give opinions against Alliances leagues are in the biggest/oldest alliances, that is maybe because they see the potential issues it could bring. I can personnally imagine some alliance being frustrated because leagues aren't fair, or an alliance of certain league being advantaged by it's location near from a certain battle spot, etc. And im not talking about to chose various battle spot, and make only that or that league being able to occupy there.

The idea of having more battle spots all over the map is for me a good compromise to avoid leagues. Issue of that, though, is that big alliances could attack spots held by some small alliances because they are getting high scores... that's to avoid that that i also proposed leagues, not for alliances fight restrictions, but only for rewards. Biggest alliances wouldn't want to wipe out encampments of smaller ones that are getting a high score, if that score is not competing with their own score.

So for me, if we dont have leagues restricting small alliances to fight against big ones, and if to compensate that, we put more battle spots, then we should however have rewards given by leagues.


I like the idea of making faction hubs as tourney spots for that aim, as they are numerousous and spread all over the map... though, the issue i would see about that, is about the terrain type of these hubs. Important thing about battle spots, is that we must have the equal proportion of Plains, Hills, Forests and Mountains, not to disadvantage anyone, and have various strategies and playstyles comming up. Though, Hubs could receive a randomly afftected terrain type IMO.




Edited by Mandarins31 - 27 Jan 2012 at 10:43

Your last sentence sumed up what i was about to say; a bit too complicated to make that for mid-February. Though, interesting thoughts. Aside from trouney itself, some of your suggestions can enter in a subject about future actions with faction or in a jubject about quests.

About using the 3x3 squares of each faction hub to have different terrain types and allow differnt lvl of alliances to fight on a same faction hub... well, average 150 hubs X 9 squares per hub, now that makes too many battles sites. We could have it with less factions hubs put as battle sites. But i would still prefer to see 1 faction hub as 1 big square of a certain terrain type for that tourney.

Anjire wrote: Mandarins31 wrote: Your last sentence sumed up what i was about to say; a bit too complicated to make that for mid-February. Though, interesting thoughts. Aside from trouney itself, some of your suggestions can enter in a subject about future actions with faction or in a jubject about quests. About using the 3x3 squares of each faction hub to have different terrain types and allow differnt lvl of alliances to fight on a same faction hub... well, average 150 hubs X 9 squares per hub, now that makes too many battles sites. We could have it with less factions hubs put as battle sites. But i would still prefer to see 1 faction hub as 1 big square of a certain terrain type for that tourney. The point of having too many possible battle sites is that it will force even the largest alliances to make hard decisions on how to stretch their resources.

That is called balance, and letting the smartest alliance win. We shouldn't have leagues cause it would ruin the whole point of a tournament. There are winners and losers and with each winner/loser there will be someone that cries that it was unfair.

Point of a tournament is to fight to be the best, to see who is the best, and to have fun. You can say that leagues would be fair, but think of it this way. What if someone split off from a high pop alliance and made his own. A 30k pop alliance with just himself. That would mean he would have an advantage, big advantage, over the lesser alliances that total only 30k pop. There are to many faults with something like this.

You need to think about the bigger picture and stop trying to make everyone a winner. Just think if H? had a spot, and all alliances had to get that spot. That would put H? at a disadvantage. Though if you split things up into leagues, that would for sure give H? and all the other leaders of that league an advantage over the other alliances. Since they would not have to compete against everyone else. Only the other people in their league. It will be far less fun and little competition.

Stop trying to ruin the real reason of a tournament.  

Anjire wrote: None of my posts called for a tournament split up into leagues so I don't know if you are directing your response to me or the thread title.

Oh no sorry, was trying to add onto ya'lls post.